But since NATO’s European allies have nowhere else to turn for their defense or security, all but one of them, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, stood her ground.

From the very start of the summit, Trump was true to his mantra. The Europeans are not spending enough on defense. That’s well-known. The United States, as ever, is paying the lion’s share. That’s well-known, too. But two of his remarks overshadowed the summit declaration—which devoted a huge amount of space to Russia and sharply criticized the country—won’t be forgotten by NATO officials in general or by Merkel in particular.

“During the president’s remarks today at the NATO summit he suggested that countries not only meet their commitment of 2 percent of their GDP on defense spending, but that they increase it to 4 percent,” White House press secretary, Sarah Sanders, said. Well, Trump might as well pluck an even bigger figure out of his hat during the next summit.

Whether he was serious or not, one just doesn’t know. He didn’t raise the issue during the dinner. But when it came to criticizing Germany, Trump was entirely focused.

He berated Merkel for spending only 1.2 percent of GDP on defense. Yes, it is too low in comparison to the size of the country’s economy. But Merkel and her defense minister, Ursula von der Leyen, are committed to spending a more over the next several years. That didn’t impress or convince Trump.

What he did seem convinced about was the highly controversial Nord Stream 2 pipeline. This joint venture between Russia’s Gazprom and a consortium of European companies will allow Russia to send more gas via two pipelines laid under the Baltic Sea directly to Germany.

The charges against Nord Stream 2 have been well-rehearsed. Ukraine’s role as a transit route for Russia gas will be reduced, with a considerable loss of transit fees. And instead of Germany—but also Europe—increasing its diversification of energy supplies, Europe’s dependence on Russia could be consolidated.

Merkel herself used to describe Nord Stream 2 simply as a commercial project. It has now turned into a major geostrategic and political issue. Trump is threatening German and other companies with sanctions if they continue to support Nord Stream 2.

Ignore the fact that he would be pleased if those gas supplies would be replaced by liquefied natural gas shipped from the United States. And ignore the fact that Russia is the major shareholder in Nord Stream 2, which is unlikely to figure in Trump’s discussions with Putin in Helsinki on July 16.

What really irked Merkel was when Trump, using Berlin’s commitment to the pipeline, argued that Germany was “captive” to Russia. Merkel was not going to let that pass. She didn’t need any lessons about Russia or history.

“I have experienced myself how a part of Germany was controlled by the Soviet Union,” she said on her arrival to the summit. “I am very happy that today we are united in freedom, the Federal Republic of Germany. Because of that we can say that we can make our independent policies and make independent decisions. That is very good, especially for people in eastern Germany.”

Publicly at least, not one NATO leader or Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg rallied around Germany. And there’s little doubt that Poland and the Baltic States are delighted with Trump’s criticism of Nord Stream 2. But does Merkel’s leadership and Germany’s trade surplus always have to be the targets of Trump’s hectoring of an important strategic, economic, and political ally?

Indeed, Trump’s blustering may well have its limits. It could tap into anti-American sentiments, particularly in Germany. Only 15 percent of Germans agree with Merkel that Germany should reach NATO’s 2 percent defense spending goal in 2024; 24 percent say spending 1.5 percent is right, while 36 percent believe it is already too much.

Merkel is caught in a bind over the defense budget and over Nord Stream 2.

Politically and strategically the pipeline should have been dumped as soon as Merkel became chancellor back in 2005. She could still ditch the project, although now she would be criticized for bowing to American pressure. But if Trump is serious about sanctions, Merkel may have no option.

Indeed, given the way she rallied other European countries to impose sanctions on Russia over its illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014 and its subsequent invasion of the Donbas region in Eastern Ukraine, the cancellation of Nord Stream 2 should have been part of that sanctions package.

As the first day of the NATO summit progressed, whether prompted by aides or not, Trump was positively conciliatory during his meeting with Merkel.

“We’re having a great meeting. We’re discussing military expenditure,” Trump said. “We have a very, very good relationship with the chancellor. We have a tremendous relationship with Germany… you’ve had tremendous success and I congratulate you. Tremendous success. And I believe that our trade will increase and lots of other things will increase. But we’ll see what happens over the next period of a few months.” Indeed.

Before that, let see what happens during the day two of this NATO summit in Brussels.

Post your comments 2500 character limit. No links or markup permitted. Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately. Screen names appear with your comment.

Screen Name

Follow the conversation—Sign up to receive email updates when comments are posted to this article.

Email Address

Characters Used 0

Lic. Pierre Millet

July 12, 20187:15 am

I believe that NATO it's an organization and their strategies are very important in order to maintain the peace, the democracy and liberty around the Europe, the United States of America and our convulse world today. Frankly each European country must pay a quote more objective in function of their military defensa against the comun enemies of the real democracy and liberty.
Thanks.

Post your comments 2500 character limit. No links or markup permitted. Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately. Screen names appear with your comment.

Screen Name

Follow the conversation—Sign up to receive email updates when comments are posted to this article.

Email Address

Characters Used 0

Lic. Pierre Millet

July 12, 20187:26 am

President Donald Trump must be more reflexive and diplomatic with the historic European allies, because the just and necessary commercial relations with them are very important for all. The United States of America can't insolate. The diplomatic and commercial relations with our enemies will be continue, but we must be more attentive and with more intelligence every time elsewhere with him.
Thanks.

Post your comments 2500 character limit. No links or markup permitted. Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately. Screen names appear with your comment.

Screen Name

Follow the conversation—Sign up to receive email updates when comments are posted to this article.

Email Address

Characters Used 0

US Army retired

July 12, 20188:23 am

The truth of the matter is many of the statements made byTrump in Brussels reflect the perspectives of the economic draftees in today's supposedly all volunteer military. The perspectives of the officer core are more compex. The idea that German and Western European social benefits are being,indirectly subsidized by the high US contributions to NATO defense is wide spread. Enlisted personnel often go home to families in moderate poverty, to communities with high levels of unemployment.
In 2013, 44% of all US military recruits came from the South region of the U.S. despite it having only 36% of the country's 18-24 year-old civilian population. Since the beginning of the second Iraq War, various measures have shown that rural communities have contributed a disproportionate number of men and women to the military. The fifty US counties with the highest rates of recruitment are generally amongst lower population counties in the USA. Examination of deaths based on hometown in the Department of Defense records shows soldiers from rural America are dying at a higher rate than soldiers from big cities and suburbs. In all but eight states, soldiers from rural areas1 make up a disproportionately high share of casualties.
My belief is Trump's performance in Brussels will play very well to his electoral base and among many enlisted personnel in the US military. It very well might help him get reelected.

Post your comments 2500 character limit. No links or markup permitted. Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately. Screen names appear with your comment.

Screen Name

Follow the conversation—Sign up to receive email updates when comments are posted to this article.

Email Address

Characters Used 0

Alexis de Pleshcoy

July 12, 20181:20 pm

One day a US President will stand up for us, the US. Hopefully this one could, and soon initiate a ten-year moratorium on military exercises.
Our military budget is a fraction of the medical expenses, comparable with the roughly $250 billion spent on administrative medical expenses; add obesity related expenses and it is close.
A fraction of this money would have been better spent in our near abroad, the space of the Monroe doctrine. The refugees arriving at the border are under more threats than the wealthy EU, Iranian ICBM’s or Russian tanks (strangely, nuclear annihilation is a more probable scenario, following a Bismarck “some damned foolish thing in the Balkans”, read East).
The EU NATO members should know that it is not even the 20-30 trillion wasted on nuclear weapons, and Russia should remember that during the Berlin airlift the US has nuclear weapons.
What it is most and foremost is that we are at 2 minutes to midnight on the Doomsday Clock. All of us might live though the unthinkable (watch “The Day After” for a dramatization).
The fall of the Soviet communism was unthinkable too, same the MPS people not bothering to read the PRC Constitution.
Worse, each of us was offered $6.49 to become mercenaries. Students having to pay $1.5 trillion in student loans, their grandparents facing Medicare cuts should respond that NATO is based on values, not money.
As strange as it sounds this offer was relayed by many, including the local media; there is a concentric attack on the collective brain of the nation that any attempt to achieve some modus vivendi with Russia is equivalent with treason; Tiraspol is a red line for CNN, Crimea a casus belli; even entertainers want just war, Maher; Ocasio-Cortez doesn’t.
The locally trained PhD’s will never understand that in the European intellectual tradition you first learn history, geography and much more and only afterwards unleash your inner liberal arts self and ask for war.
If they did, they’d know that the only way for peace in Europe is some EU variant, De Gaulle’s Europe. People and goods should cross the EU in freight trains, not in tanks.
If we make it to the 11th hour of 11/11/2018, stop for a minute and think about a century of relative peace, unheard of in the killing field called Europe.
Nobody should even remotely believe that any moratorium on military exercises means peace but delays the possibility of accidental war.
The minor NATO budget increase should be used to build an AI we could ask for advice on peace.

Comment Policy

Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, or other inappropriate material will be removed. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, steps will be taken to block users who violate any of the posting standards, terms of use, privacy policies, or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.